Did Sam Bankman-Fried allegedly commit one of the world’s largest crypto-frauds because he was just trying too hard to help people? SBF identified as a utilitarian and was raised by two self-identified utilitarian professors. Does the philosophy’s emphasis on doing the most good encourage people to lie, cheat, and steal to get more cash? Does the effective altruism movement, which is largely applied utilitarianism, do the same thing? Do we need future investment to read more Kant and
I’m not so sure the support of polyamory is bad… Leaving aside the reasons polyamory itself might be good, here are some reasons *supporting* polyamory might be good.
Think about veganism, on the one hand, utilitarians being adamant about veganism will push some people away from the movement and, by extension, helping the poor. On the other hand, some people who entered because of their desire to help the poor might now be persuaded to become vegan. It cuts both ways.
Secondly, for some people it might be good for their mental health. If they get motivation to be more active/prosocial because of their polycule this would undoubtedly be positive.
On top of that, it’s honest. Honestly conveying the implications of your movement might seem detrimental in the short term, but helps retainment, media relations and coordination in the longrun.
I’m personally not in a polycule and am agnostic towards whether one should. I just don’t think it’s a clearcut case.
I’m not so sure the support of polyamory is bad… Leaving aside the reasons polyamory itself might be good, here are some reasons *supporting* polyamory might be good.
Think about veganism, on the one hand, utilitarians being adamant about veganism will push some people away from the movement and, by extension, helping the poor. On the other hand, some people who entered because of their desire to help the poor might now be persuaded to become vegan. It cuts both ways.
Secondly, for some people it might be good for their mental health. If they get motivation to be more active/prosocial because of their polycule this would undoubtedly be positive.
On top of that, it’s honest. Honestly conveying the implications of your movement might seem detrimental in the short term, but helps retainment, media relations and coordination in the longrun.
I’m personally not in a polycule and am agnostic towards whether one should. I just don’t think it’s a clearcut case.
Can't take seriously anyone who blathers about Pascal's Rationalization. Might as well go all the way https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/GXzT2Ei3nvyZEdWef/every-moment-of-an-electron-s-existence-is-suffering